This paper addresses the evaluation of the testing of writing of foreign languages and compares two evaluation methods: the analytical method and the holistic method. The analytical method focuses on the mechanics of writing where the writer is measured against a set of empirical standards and a composition is dissected for the critical points. The holistic method looks at a composition as a writing sample and compares the communicative effectiveness of one composition against another of the same type. The writing compositions of 10 college-age English-as-Second-Language (ESL) students were graded by ESL teachers in Japan, some using the holistic method and some using the analytic method. Results showed that both ratings were very close, with the maximum difference of three points in a 20-point scale, and the ratings had a high correlation with the writers' Test of English as a Foreign Language scores. Findings indicate that written English can be tested and the testing of written English can be carried out with satisfactorily high reliability. In terms of measurement, reliability includes the correlation of writing scores with external and internal measures. (Contains 13 references.) (JP)